The EU costs us every year. If we stay in long enough it must eventually cost us more than leaving.

That does not follow. The cost/benefit in terms of trade are recurring and the costs of leaving you are referring to are off-off. It is certainly possible that we cannot negotiate as good a trade deal with a major player as we have through the EU - and I think we must all agree that our negotiation skills so far have not been brilliant - in which case we would make a nominal loss every year, rather than the nominal improvement that would be needed to clear the 'cost of leaving.'

Any rise in 'Leave' is obviously being brought about by battle-fatigue - there are no advantages to leaving as requests for examples here have shown over and over again If Dyson and Lord Snooty sprint off and stick their money elsewhere that is either a sign that they are aware of the damage being done or a shoddy grasp of investment

Dave the Gnome wrote: The cost of staying will be the same as it is now. Anything else is just speculation.

Saying that is also speculation. You speculate that the EU is not a sinking ship. I don't. However, even If the ship is not about to sink, The EU costs us every year. If we stay in long enough it must eventually cost us more than leaving.

DMcG wrote: Many of them have customers who can only afford to buy their goods/services because they are employed by businesses that do trade with the EU, or the 87% may buy products from wholesalers who trade with the EU.

A fair point, and one of which I was not unaware. I was sort of hoping that JC would make that point and I could then point out that he said Britain no longer has any industry. Ho hum.

Untangling ourselves from the EU was always likely to have a cost. What you, I or anyone else, can predict is the cost that we will incur if we do not extricate ourselves from what I see as a sinking ship. It's not just leaving that will cost us. Staying could cost us a lot more.

Even if it is true that 87% businesses do not trade with the EU, it does not follow that they do not depend on EU trade. Many of them have customers who can only afford to buy their goods/services because they are employed by businesses that do trade with the EU, or the 87% may buy products from wholesalers who trade with the EU. It is a statistic that is easily misunderstood by the unwary.

Jim Carroll wrote: Leaving Europe,as things stand, is comparable to a had-done-by teenager declaring they are leaving home As many of them end up on the streets, there's a valuable lesson to le learned there.

More merriment! To extend your analogy the hard done by teenagers are the second largest financial contributor in a household of twenty seven. Something like 87% of UK businesses do NOT trade with the EU. They will keep on trading whatever happens.

"You know."You got the first vote wrong so do it again" No - we mean "we voted for this without being given any game plan for the future - now that we know what is likely to happen - and is already happening (like the financiers and promoters of Brexit tripping over themselves to put their investments in a safer place than a Brexited Britain) we would like an opportunity to confirm the decision" Great that those with the money can change their minds, but the voters are not given a chance to. Leaving Europe,as things stand, is comparable to a had-done-by teenager declaring they are leaving home As many of them end up on the streets, there's a valuable lesson to le learned there. I don't expect for one moment that Stan the Man will respond to any of this - much more comfortable not to Jim Carroll

It seems Olly Robbins is off to Brussels again today about "how the broad outline of the future arrangement between the EU and the UK could be changed if there were to be some kind of deal" (in the words of Laura Kuenssberg.)

The future arrangements are defined by the political declaration attached to the Withdrawal Agreement and are not legally binding. That would not matter so much if both sides committed to them in good faith. But since the UK side has possible May replacements who openly declare they do not agree with what it says, it is hard to see the value of this.

There was a beautiful moment on Politics Live today. Lord Adonis was there to promote a second referendum. You know."You got the first vote wrong so do it again" sort of thing. In a subsequent subject, a Labour Council ignored residents requests to restore a public clock. At the last election the council became independent and the clock was restored. One of the panelists criticised Labour for not listening to the voters. Lord Adonis, who is a Labour peer, praised how Labour always listens to the voters. I'm surprised the rest of the panel didn't fall of their seats laughing. "You got the first vote wrong so do it again".

Yep, Accept that we are never going to reach an agreed settlement with the EU, and use the remaining 4 months to plan for leaving on WTO terms.

Four months after November 2018? Ah yes, the end of March 2019. It is no great leap to believe your statement of 23 December, about 4 weeks later, was referring to the same date. And then, a little while later (12 Jan 2019) I also suggested your prediction was for that date, and whether you overlooked that post or chose not to reply, you did not correct me then.

So while I say for the third time I accept you did not explicitly give both halves of the prediction at the same time, you did tie leaving on WTO rules and the date together a few weeks earlier, so it is not unreasonable to consider you still had that date in mind for the prediction. Certainly, you gave not the slightest hint against it.

That's all I have to say on this. Shall we agree to move onto actual events to do with Brexit, shall we?

As I was emphasing the difference between being mistaken and lying, and said you were NOT lying, that is a bit of an over reaction, don't you think, Nigel? Whether you were claiming I was lying, or that I was mistaken, is beside the point, as you were referring to a statement which I never made. That is an excellent example of a straw man fallacy

A reminder of what Thatcher was being defensive about https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/tories-have-forgotten-that-thatcher-wasnt-just-a-terrorist-sympathiser-but-close-friends-with-one-10507850.html

Parliament represents the interests of the electorate, not their wishes, and definitely not the wishes of an electorate three years ago, wilfully misinformed by the leave supporting politicians and the sewer press. Parliament has enough data, from the scenario assessments carried out by the government themselves (but hidden in so far as they can) to work out that remaining in the EU is in the best interests of the majority. So remain they should.

Indeed they should. To run with the hares and hunt with the hounds will always end in tears.

Cameron said the people must decide. They did with a referendum! Article 50 was passed with a huge majority. A General Election was called with both parties advocating leave as the mainstay of their ticket.

Since that time a majority in the house have tried to frustrate brexit and destroy democracy.

Both leavers and remainers feel very strongly that Parliament is willfully denying the wishes of the electorate. As recent polls show very clearly the backlash against the two main parties is gathering strength daily. It has now gone beyond simply brexit and the behaviour of both Labour and the Tories is regarded as an affront to democracy.

There was a beautiful moment on Politics Live today. Lord Adonis was there to promote a second referendum. You know."You got the first vote wrong so do it again" sort of thing. In a subsequent subject, a Labour Council ignored residents requests to restore a public clock. At the last election the council became independent and the clock was restored. One of the panelists criticised Labour for not listening to the voters. Lord Adonis, who is a Labour peer, praised how Labour always listens to the voters. I'm surprised the rest of the panel didn't fall of their seats laughing. "You got the first vote wrong so do it again".

Richard Epstein is not "a respected academic". His affiliation is given as "New York University", which you might think was a major academic institution in New York, but it isn't, the main universities in New York are the State University of New York, the City University of New York, and Cornell University and Columbia University, which are of course Ivy League, and the most prestigious. New York University is a "Non-Sectarian Private College".

tories have never had the bottle or ability to stand up to the even further right in their own party and the way they dealt with the nutters and fascists around ukip and beyond was nothing short of appeasement. sadly, the labour party are equally clueless in dealing with the thoroughly nasty extremists in the tory party and their loud and aggressive friends who find farage a bit wet these days. it's all very scary.

The frightening thing about all this is, out of them all, May is a 'moderate' The Conservative Party has been hovering on the brink of fascism since the heady days of Powell's 'Rivers of Blood', followed later by Thatcher's climbing into bed with Pinochet Now you have Boris of Very Little Brain and Lord Snooty waiting in the wings The somewhat limp-wristed Toryism of our own Nigel, with its willingness to let slide what is happening in their Party is a prime example of moderate Toryism. Fuhrer Farage doesn't bear thinking about - but it needs to be Jim Carroll

"What Brexit is all about" that merely discusses upcoming EU elections?" Brexit opened the door to a massive rise in fascism - inevitable, as it was based on racism in the first place I ton't expect to hear too loud shrieks of protest from Israeli supporters as the first family of French Antisemitism comes into its own - much easier to target The Labour Party Jim Carroll

Tony Blair SQUIRMS when shown Farage's COLOSSAL lead - 'No one WANTS second vote' TONY BLAIR was left squirming on Sky News this morning when he was forced to confront the scale of the Brexit Party’s lead in the latest Euro election polls - and consequently face the reality that people “don’t” want a second referendum after all.

Why have a link entitled "What Brexit is all about" that merely discusses upcoming EU elections?

We all know that Brexit now is all about reclaiming democracy from parliament. It is no longer merely Brexit that people are voting for.

I would say Farage has far more chance of becoming PM than steptoe senior and with each successive poll support grows for the Brexit party. Very very dramatic implications for the future of UK politics seeing as the party was only created weeks ago. A clear reaction to Parliament defying the will of the people. The conclusion is undeniable!

The present numbers beat Labour and Conservative combined and that still leaves the tactical voting for the libdems looking for a useful home in order to further smite the two parties defying the electorate.

The EU elections will definitely create a "popcorn" evening of entertainment when the results come in. The subsequent wailing and gnashing of teeth will be a joy to behold!

That a lot of Brexit supporters are prepared to vote for the Brexit Party in the EU election is no surprise. However, that it seems a lot of them might be prepared to vote for it in a general election when, apart from a hard Brexit, it has not yet published any policies at all does give the 'village idiot' epithet credence.

As I was emphasing the difference between being mistaken and lying, and said you were NOT lying, that is a bit of an over reaction, don't you think, Nigel? The date was implicit because no one was talking about any other date at the time. I acknowledged I knew of no post where you had explicitly said it and am happy to do so again.

I detect some confusion about what a lie is and is not. Being wrong is not a lie. Nigel repeatedly said we would be leaving on March 29th but he said it in good faith. It turned out not to be true, but that does mean it was a lie, just false. Equally, when Teresa May said it - at least to begin with - it was said in good faith and so mistaken, but not a lie.

Ah, that old story again. Assuming that I am the ´Nigel´ referred to, do you not recall checking the basis of your claim, and finding that I hadn´t actually used the claim you attributed to me? If it´s too much trouble I´ve scrolled back, and it´s in your earlier statement: From: DMcG - PM Date: 01 Apr 19 - 04:07 AM

Nigel and I have been comparing predictions, which I summarised as

Over on the earlier thread, I referred to a prediction Nigel had made that we would leave on 31st on WTO rules, whereas I predicted come the 1st April we would still be trying to decide what we are doing.

Since it is now 1st April, I thought I would check up where we were. I think we will all agree that my half was right: we are still trying to decide what to do. However, it turns out I don't have Nigel's prediction quite right. What he said was:

Conservatives are worried they might come sixth in the European Elections. Why so high? Given that their headbangers have deserted to the Brexit party or UKIP, the more reasonable among them will go with either Change UK or the Lib Dems, Scottish and Welsh to SNP or Plaid, even if lifelong Tories cannot vote Labour, there is loads of choice. And its not meaningless as a FPTP election would be.

Now for some facts about brexit:A poll of polls showed that more than half of voters who backed the Conservatives in the 2017 general election now intend to vote for the Brexit Party. The analysis indicates that the Conservatives are on course in this month’s European Parliament elections for the lowest share in history for the governing party in any national vote.

This thread os risking getting onto Trump and Hillary, rather than keeping with Brexit. All I intended to say is that Farage rallies appear to be using exactly the same techniques as Trump's did. Whether the UK cries of "Lock her up!" were simply aping Trump or were heartfelt as they certainly were at Trump's rallies I can't say, not having been at either. But both were meaningless unfounded emotional manipulation.

My wife deals with over 200 federal emails per day. Hillary had over 500. Mrs. Clinton WAS GUILTY of breaking a guideline, not a law or statute, not a grandfathered law, not even an official federal policy.

She was grilled by a republican congressional committee for an actual 12 hours until her voice gave out. It amounted to the same result as Bengasi, nothing.

If Trump had been successful in jailing Hillary, other Trump opponents and the Democratic Party could have been criminalized by now. Instead you can visit some of his cabinet in prison.

Nope. And it's Hillary. It was never was the case of a law being broken

Thanks for the correction, SRS. (Though by my typing standards having the name recognisable at all is a bonus *smile*)

You are closer to the US side than I am, of course, so obviously I will defer to you. But while I am clear no law was broken, wasn't there an accusation of a law being broken? Which there isn't with May.

It’s hilarious seeing people queueing up to join, and vote for, the party of the person who, when the Referendum result became known, shat his nether-garments and ran for the hills - too much of a coward to actually take responsibility for the delivery of that which his lies had brought to pass.

At least in the case of Hilary Clinton there was a possible law being broken,

Nope. And it's Hillary. It was never was the case of a law being broken, just GOP and Trump bullshit to try to influence the election. And two years after the election he still feels the need to fight that fight, probably to try to justify the lie.

"THERESA MAY has lost the support of one of the Tory party’s most prominent financial backers to Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party following her failure to leave the EU on time. The Conservative Party is on track for an “absolute mauling” and Labour is braced for huge losses in the EU elections as the Brexit crisis looks set to change the political landscape of the UK, a recent poll has found.

Brexit will rip support from the UK’s major parties as disillusioned parties turn to Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party in the May 23 elections in in protest against Theresa May’s handling of the UK’s exit from the EU.

Anand Menon, director of think-tank The UK in a Changing Europe, said Theresa May’s ruling government would not call an early election while the UK remains in the EU because they are expecting an “absolute mauling”.

In response to Mr Tusk's claim that there is a 30 percent chance Brexit will be cancelled, a Government spokesman said: "The British people voted to leave the EU in the biggest democratic exercise in our history and the government is focused on delivering that result.

“MPs have already voted on a second referendum a number of times and rejected it."

Both Labour and Conservatives will pay a heavy price for trapping us in the twilight zone!

From Dave's link. A spoof maybe, but these extracts are all perfectly accurate:

"Nigel Farage – armed with about as many facts as you'd find in a Harry Potter novel – interrupted, harangued and blustered his way through the entire show, cheered on by a xenophobic section of the audience...

..."It was truly wonderful to see Nigel talk over Fiona Bruce, contradict himself and tell demonstrable lies on national television.

"I mean, the way he claimed that the UK is simultaneously losing jobs to low-skilled immigrants and also depriving other countries of highly-skilled immigrants – brilliant! How Farage attempts to mask his racism beneath a rhetoric of border control is masterful.

"And then there was the WTO question from the audience. Unable to answer, Farage spouted ill-informed nonsense about trade deals which demonstrated his sheer desperation to leave the EU at any cost to the British people."